That type of information is standard on most anything you buy. It's simply a way the manufacturers cover their ***. A Corvette's operators manual says to "Obey all posted speed limits" yet they make a car that goes almost 200mph and it has a 170mph speedometer.

It's not that helmet manufacturers really give a rats *** if you paint your helmet or put a rubber band on it, but if they did NOT tell you not to do it and for whatever reason you had an issue, then you would sue them based on the fact that "They" never warned you.

If that is your Chiefs argument for not putting things on your helmet, then show up what the tag on the inside of your turnout coat says. There is a whole list of things your not supposed to do. Including one that says

"Do NOT use this garment if soiled, torn, abraded or worn"

So, that means mister "By the book" Chief better get you a buch of spare gear. My gear gets soiled just walking in some places. If i spill coffe on my coat, should it pulled out of service? And worn? Define "Worn"? My gear is faded, that sounds worn to me. My gear does not in any way look new. So it's worn. I guess i technically should not be wearing it.

Go look at any magenetic mount warning light, like a mini bar. You wll find a label that says "For stationary use only, not for use on a moving vehicle". Do you ever see anybody not putting a warning light on untill they go to the fire?

McDonalds coffee cups have a warning on them, "Caution, coffee may be hot".

Again, the vast majority of safety labels are completley worthless. If you followed them to the letter, you would get nothing done. They are nothing more then protection for the manufacturer.

I am well aware of why the warnings are on there, I'm just giving the OP another possible reason as to why his chief won't allow additions on their helmet. As the chief, that's his perogative.

But, to take into account your information, let's assume his chief does allow him to alter his helmet. Let's say he goes into a house and his helmet-mounted flashlight snags on some wiring and rips his helmet off. While in this mess, he stands up and knocks himself out on something because he has no helmet. Well, he's holed up in the hospital for a while and gets a visit from an attorney saying "you know, your chief allowed you to modify your helmet beyond what the manufacturer allowed, it's his and your department's fault your here." See where I'm going with this?

Bottom line in this whole thing is something I said before, the chief is responsible for the department, the equipment, and his personnel. If he says "no" to modifying a helmet, you don't modify the helmet.

Bottom line in this whole thing is something I said before, the chief is responsible for the department, the equipment, and his personnel. If he says "no" to modifying a helmet, you don't modify the helmet.

No argument there.

My posts show that. My only issue was if my Cheif was claiming it's an NFPA thing, point me to the rule. Not so i can argue it. But so i can have a better understanding as to why. Again, there is nothing wrong with having an understanding of a rule. No matter the rule. I am sure there are people who are simply too afraid to question anything. But you need to understand that just because you want to know why something is the way it is does not mean you are looking for an argument.

Everybody is quick to say "Who cares why, shut up and do as your told". But i would rather know the reasons then to just simply go "OK". And ill say it again, knowing why is not so i can argue, i simply want to know for my own knowledge. Again, if your ok with blindly following anything and everything a superior tells you, that is your choice. On the fireground, ill do as i am told without hesitation. But anything i take issue with ill research later. Maybe ill bring it up with an Officer, maybe i won't. But people should know rules and regulations to have a better understanding.

"This standard shall not specify requirements for any accessories that could be attached to the certified product, but are not necessary for the certified product to meet the requirements of this standard"

In other words, no NFPA regulation says anything about NOT being allowed to have a helmet band on your helmet, or a flashlight.

"This standard shall not specify requirements for any accessories that could be attached to the certified product, but are not necessary for the certified product to meet the requirements of this standard"

In other words, no NFPA regulation says anything about NOT being allowed to have a helmet band on your helmet, or a flashlight.

You got that out of NFPA 1971, a.1.1.5? I ask because I didn't find that sentence anywhere in a.1.1.5.

The very first sentence of that section pretty much sums up the rest of what it says; "Fire and emergency response organizations are cautioned that accessories are nto a part of the certified product but could be attached to the certified product by means not engineered, manufactured, or authorized by the manufacturer."

In short, if it's not on it when it left the manufacturer, or not authorized by the manufacturer as an approved add-on, it's not recommended to be added to your PPE.

"This standard shall not specify requirements for any accessories that could be attached to the certified product, but are not necessary for the certified product to meet the requirements of this standard"

In other words, no NFPA regulation says anything about NOT being allowed to have a helmet band on your helmet, or a flashlight.

You need to read the appendix as well, A.1.1.5, which puts more stipulations and requirements on such modifications. Hence the * after 1.1.5.

You got that out of NFPA 1971, a.1.1.5? I ask because I didn't find that sentence anywhere in a.1.1.5.

The very first sentence of that section pretty much sums up the rest of what it says; "Fire and emergency response organizations are cautioned that accessories are nto a part of the certified product but could be attached to the certified product by means not engineered, manufactured, or authorized by the manufacturer."

In short, if it's not on it when it left the manufacturer, or not authorized by the manufacturer as an approved add-on, it's not recommended to be added to your PPE.

He didn't...it was 1.1.5 with that sentence along with the * for more info in the appendix.

My first sense is this guy has a major fear of liability. I'd be scared working for someone with that much fear of such an insignificant issue.

I am not sure if "fear" is the correct word... maybe a healthy dose of respect. The Fire Chief bears the ultimate responsibility for the operation of the FD. His perspective is likely to be broader than a tailboard firefighter. If you are scared of your boss, you may need to go to Plan "B".

Originally Posted by RFDACM02

I would disobey the order...

I'd be careful with that one. Depending on where you work and your rank, the consequences of insubordination include progressive discipline up to, and including, termination. You could also be subjected to both civil action and/or criminal charges based on your actions.

I'd be careful with that one. Depending on where you work and your rank, the consequences of insubordination include progressive discipline up to, and including, termination. You could also be subjected to both civil and criminal charges based on your actions.

My bad, I left out the n't. While I wouldn't like it, I'd always concede to fulfilling the wishes of a superior and fight the battle via the Union or other solution. Short of out and out endangerment, I wouldn't support disobeying, there's usually a better time and place.